Veitch sentenced

[jrandom]

*mainly in town at night*

And there y'go. Anyone who gets drunk and gets into silly fights is an idiot, male or female. Entirely avoidable, and not what this thread is about.

My point is that you're very unlikely to find a woman who's actually aggressive, in a directed fashion. One that you'd need to be afraid of. Their violence is almost always relatively undirected, and a result of random emotional turmoil and/or drunkenness, etc. Walk away and it no longer affects you.

And, I mean, all this talk focusing on kicks in the nuts? It's because that's about the only possible way a woman can hurt a man without a weapon. The exception proves the rule, etc.

See, thing is - in 99% of cases, a woman can go crazy on a man, and he might get a few scratches or bruises. But if he responds in kind, there'll be broken bones. The difference between the sexes just is what it is.

I think a few guys in this thread might have one or two issues involving resentment and physical inadequacy vis-a-vis females, to be honest.

[discotex]

OK seems you have had a bad experience with women kicking you in the balls.

Not at all. If you actually read my posts you'd know that

My first ever visit to the GI pub I was 15 (ok you lot thats a while ago) and I watched a blind man get beaten up just because he tripped over someone. This was were I lived. This was my home. Would I kick a man in the balls...well depends on if he deserved it!

What has that got to do with what we're debating?

Your average 'weedy' guy with a fat missus is still a fair bit stronger than her.

And, also, walking away is almost always an option. Women tend not to be aggressive so much as flustered - move out of range and disengage, and the problem disappears. When 'fighting' with a woman, it is simply not necessary to engage in active fisticuffs to avoid personal injury.

Totally agree. However I'm not suggesting that the male party should use the old "the best defense is a good offense" approach.

Only that reasonable force should be acceptable. E.g. if she breaks her hand on his head he shouldn't face an assault charge. Or if he restrains her to stop her punching and kicking and accidentally causes a bruise he shouldn't be charged.

The exception to the low female aggression thing being, of course, darkies. But they generally have brown partners, too, who tend to be genetically large, so the problem sort of evens itself out.

don't go down the cheekie darkie road.

Now, I know a few women who've been in physically violent relationships. The controlling, abusive shit that goes on in that context is simply not something that normal human psychology and physiology allows to happen in the other direction.

Sadly it cuts both ways. Both sexes have the same ability to be despots.

The difference is abusive women tend to use non-physical means rather than use physical violence. And yes that's because generally men can defend themselves.

What nonsense. Assuming there were witnesses to the assault, she'd certainly be charged and convicted.

Ya reckon? Wonder how many convictions there have been for female assaults male as a result of a good ball kicking? Willing to be $50 it's less than 5.

Still, you're in absolute la-la land if a woman kicks you in the nuts and you didn't either soundly deserve it, or see it coming a mile off.

I'd half agree but the "he must have deserved it" way of thinking isn't too dissimilar to the view on domestic violence not that long ago.

It wasn't long ago that "she must have deserved it" was the standard response. The assumption being it was un-acceptable for her to have not cooked dinner and his response was a valid reaction.


Look, someone's gotta protect the skinny white guy from his islander husband basher (your stereotype not mine)

I agree it's the exception that a women can seriously hurt a man. My point is there still needs to be repercussions for women who resort to physical violence.

If we say "if it doesn't hurt it wasn't assault" I'd say that was a fair reason for your reasoning. E.g. a slap on the face is ok from both sexes if it doesn't cause a bruise. The thing is you and I both know a male slapping a women causing no injury or bruise would be charged but not the other way around. Given it caused no injury in either case how is one assault and not the other?

[discotex]

I think a few guys in this thread might have one or two issues involving resentment and physical inadequacy vis-a-vis females, to be honest.

I love it when you try to play Dr Phil on what you read on a forum.

It's a good way to distract people from a debate you know you're losing don't you think?

[Grahameeboy]

Veitch is a presenter, not a reporter. There's a very big difference.

He's now also a convicted thug who seems to have avoided a jail sentence, thanks to a bit of cunning legal manouvering.

I don't agree with what he did, however, sounds llike it was an uncharacteristic action (correct me if I am wrong) and jail is not the place for him if we all agree it is to keep bad people off the streets and rehabilitate.

He is not a bad person, he made a mistake in a moment of anger. He is not a thug...if you have met thugs like Mr Cray, then you would know what a thug is....Mr V is a million mile from that I can assure you...

His more than average life has been affected and he has endured more attention etc than most offenders and I think he is a better person for it.

[rosie631]

First we need to understand. Why did he do it? Yes he's wrong for doing it, yes there's a bunch of stuff around it that abfuscates the story. But first and foremost - why did he do it? What drove him to that point where he took the course of action he did?

I'm probably about to tell more of my personal history on here than I normally would, but I can't let this go unanswered. I don't give a flying fuck why he did it. I have been in the situation of being behind locked gates having the crap beat out of me, by someone way bigger and stronger than me. And believe me, my only thought was how am i going to get out of here before he kills me. I certainly was not thinking WHY is he doing this? In his case it was because of alcohol. I don't know if that was the case with Veitch but I DON'T CARE. Fact is - HE DID IT

[ManDownUnder]

I don't know if that was the case with Veitch but I DON'T CARE. Fact is - HE DID IT

Yup - he did it and I don't condone it in any way shape or form. He deserve fair trial and the punishment the court sees fit to pass.

My focus on the "why" is because without that answer there's nothing to prevent it happening again. It's NOT an attempt to belittle the incident, or excuse Tony or any of that. It is purely to stop it happening again, because what he did is deplorable

[ital916]

I'm probably about to tell more of my personal history on here than I normally would, but I can't let this go unanswered. I don't give a flying fuck why he did it. I have been in the situation of being behind locked gates having the crap beat out of me, by someone way bigger and stronger than me. And believe me, my only thought was how am i going to get out of here before he kills me. I certainly was not thinking WHY is he doing this? In his case it was because of alcohol. I don't know if that was the case with Veitch but I DON'T CARE. Fact is - HE DID IT

Yes he did it, no one is arguing that he didnt. All we are saying is dont look at it so black and white. We shoud be looking at why as just hanging the guy isnt going to help is it. He has had his time in court, be found guilty and will be punished.

A witch hunt is not needed.

I am sorry to hear of what happened to you, never should someone have to go through that *I know I have my own horror stories*. I hope he got his comeuppence.

Unlike most people though I also vocalise my opposition to the idea that men are never victims. There is minimal support and help for abused husbands or males be it physical or mental. You think women are embarrassed to ask for help, imagine what men go through asking for help from an abusive wife.

Do a bit of digging and youll find the number of abusive relationships where the roles are reversed is a lot. Why dont the men just harder up and walk away you say? For the same reason wives sometimes cant, men are human beings. We undergo mental trauma as well as being slaves to notions of love or commitment even when detrimental to ones own well being.

So dont be quick to jump up and down on his head. Again not saying his actions are correct but just because she says he is a demon does not mean that he is. Who knows what sort of abuse was thrown both ways, all we know is he snapped first.

[Skyryder]

Everything Veitch has said is about himself and his rehabilitation in the eyes of the public.

Yesterday he had the chance to make a personal apology.........to his 'victim'....he did not. Instead all he could talk about was himself............ how he had been 'defamed' and that he was going to sue some media organisations.

Veitch is nothing but a mouth intent on claiming that he is the 'real' victim.

Skyryder

[rosie631]

Everything Veitch has said is about himself and his rehabilitation in the eyes of the public.

Yesterday he had the chance to make a personal apology.........to his 'victim'....he did not. Instead all he could talk about was himself............ how he had been 'defamed' and that he was going to sue some media organisations.

Veitch is nothing but a mouth intent on claiming that he is the 'real' victim.

Skyryder

Exactly. The only 'remorse' he has shown is because of the grief his actions have caused himself. No remorse for his victim.

[mynameis]

Not condoning physical violence for one second.

BUT

Perhaps there should also be a law against mental violence?????

Soft cock

[Grahameeboy]

Everything Veitch has said is about himself and his rehabilitation in the eyes of the public.

Yesterday he had the chance to make a personal apology.........to his 'victim'....he did not. Instead all he could talk about was himself............ how he had been 'defamed' and that he was going to sue some media organisations.

Veitch is nothing but a mouth intent on claiming that he is the 'real' victim.

Skyryder

Lest we forget that the ex girlfriend was happy to take a lump sum off of him...

He has already made media apology for what he did...how many apologies are required.

I think the media have been pretty bad myself...yes he was wrong but did he deserve to be plastered all over the media for months on end...so in that respect he was made a victim by the media.

What he did was wrong but in a moment of madness...he now has a chance....

[Grahameeboy]

Soft cock

Maybe that is what the ex said to upset him....

[ManDownUnder]

Everything Veitch has said is about himself and his rehabilitation in the eyes of the public.

... you've been privy to everything he's said?

[James Deuce]

I don't agree with what he did, however, sounds llike it was an uncharacteristic action (correct me if I am wrong) and jail is not the place for him if we all agree it is to keep bad people off the streets and rehabilitate.

He is not a bad person, he made a mistake in a moment of anger. He is not a thug...if you have met thugs like Mr Cray, then you would know what a thug is....Mr V is a million mile from that I can assure you...

His more than average life has been affected and he has endured more attention etc than most offenders and I think he is a better person for it.

If I'd crippled someone I'd go to jail. I don't have Graham Henry to write me a character reference.

The coward crippled a woman by kicking her when she lay on the floor, essentially because she wound him up.

If did it, you'd all be screaming for me to be strung up. If a gang member from Cannon's Creek did it, you'd all be screaming for him to be strung up.

Someone involved in sport in NZ, either player or presenter, obvuously leads a charmed life.

He is a bad person. He crippled someone. He made her life immeasurably and pointlessly more difficult than it needed to be. There's no witch hunt needed, no over analysis needed. Tony Veitch crippled someone because she was mouthy and wouldn't do what he wanted.

Fact.

[ManDownUnder]

I have an idea. We could save a shitload of money on the judicial system and introduce trial by media!

It's faultless... we the public know it all anyway right? And imagine the savings if we don't need to keep paying all those namby pambies that interpret the law, critically examine evidence etc.

Right - so let's start with everything the media have reported on Veitch and his ex...